Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24748384›Full record

ArticlePloS one2014

Genotyping-by-sequencing for Populus population genomics: an assessment of genome sampling patterns and filtering approaches.

Martin P Schilling, Paul G Wolf, Aaron M Duffy, Hardeep S Rai, Carol A Rowe, Bryce A Richardson, Karen E Mock

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. The History of Lentil (Frontiers in plant science · 2021
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Global gene flow releases invasive plants from environmental constraints on genetic diversity.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2020
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Martin P SchillingDepartment of Biology, Utah State University, Logan, Utah, United States of America; Ecology Center, Utah State University, Logan, Utah, United States of America.
Paul G WolfDepartment of Biology, Utah State University, Logan, Utah, United States of America; Ecology Center, Utah State University, Logan, Utah, United States of America.
Aaron M DuffyDepartment of Biology, Utah State University, Logan, Utah, United States of America.
Hardeep S RaiDepartment of Wildland Resources, Utah State University, Logan, Utah, United States of America.
Carol A RoweDepartment of Wildland Resources, Utah State University, Logan, Utah, United States of America.
Bryce A RichardsonRocky Mountain Research Station, USDA Forest Service, Provo, Utah, United States of America.
Karen E MockDepartment of Wildland Resources, Utah State University, Logan, Utah, United States of America; Ecology Center, Utah State University, Logan, Utah, United States of America.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Continuing advances in nucleotide sequencing technology are inspiring a suite of genomic approaches in studies of natural populations. Researchers are faced with data management and analytical scales that are increasing by orders of magnitude. With such dramatic advances comes a need to understand biases and error rates, which can be propagated and magnified in large-scale data acquisition and processing. Here we assess genomic sampling biases and the effects of various population-level data filtering strategies in a genotyping-by-sequencing (GBS) protocol. We focus on data from two species of Populus, because this genus has a relatively small genome and is emerging as a target for population genomic studies. We estimate the proportions and patterns of genomic sampling by examining the Populus trichocarpa genome (Nisqually-1), and demonstrate a pronounced bias towards coding regions when using the methylation-sensitive ApeKI restriction enzyme in this species. Using population-level data from a closely related species (P. tremuloides), we also investigate various approaches for filtering GBS data to retain high-depth, informative SNPs that can be used for population genetic analyses. We find a data filter that includes the designation of ambiguous alleles resulted in metrics of population structure and Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium that were most consistent with previous studies of the same populations based on other genetic markers. Analyses of the filtered data (27,910 SNPs) also resulted in patterns of heterozygosity and population structure similar to a previous study using microsatellites. Our application demonstrates that technically and analytically simple approaches can readily be developed for population genomics of natural populations.

Indexed as

GenotypeGenome, PlantPopulus

Identifiers

PMID24748384
PMCPMC3991623

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC0
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.